Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
294,884
edits
Changes
Conservapedia:Community Portal (view source)
Revision as of 18:44, March 6, 2023
, 18:44, March 6, 2023→I spoke to the former Conservapedia editor Philip J. Rayment today who is an Australian. He is doing well.
:Unfortunately, I missed the opportunity to work with him due to timing. However, I'm glad to hear that, and that you have been able to get in touch! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:52, January 3, 2023 (EST)
:Unfortunately, I missed the opportunity to work with him due to timing. However, I'm glad to hear that, and that you have been able to get in touch! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:52, January 3, 2023 (EST)
::He is a very nice man. It was nice talking with him. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
::He is a very nice man. It was nice talking with him. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
==Rambling questions and complaints===
:Eight questions of complaint
:1-2. How does RobS get away with moving the section about my challenge to User:Telling about the factuality of his addition to [[Ilhan Omar]]'s page regarding the person herself shortly after I left Conservapedia to do other things in Spring or Summer of 2021 a second time? Are we to assume he meant the restoring of some of my user tools were to serve as some kind of payoff for allowing him to move it to the talk page?
:3-4. How does that reflect on myself and Conservapedia? That's not a fitting picture by which I would wish to be portrayed. Why would Conservapedia allow this same unfitting picture be used to portray its administrator Rob Smith who carried out this belittling task not just under this scandalous condition but on an earlier occasion without the condition attached as well?
:I say belittling advisedly, because this whole implied transaction also tends to dwarf the fact that he removed many remarks I made afterward that couched my reply in a context providing a fuller view of the parties and the situation in which they had placed themselves with respect to the challenge, particularly the deserts of making use of the Talk:Main Page for such purposes, which really ought to be honored or at least the consideration of which remarks made mention.
:LT gave a speech about supposed left-wing anti-Semitism and did it in a fairly public place. He made remarks about Ilhan Omar, and the new information I presented about User:Telling might have shifted the weight of the balance in the other direction toward anti-Semitism not really being a factor in left-wing politics, or rather, in the leadership type of capacity, the subject in which the supposed anti-Semitism was taking place that he tried to advance through those remarks.
:5. Why doesn't LT have to stand up for himself in that same public place and defend his decision upon the presentation of new evidence about the factuality of the information User:Telling caused to appear on Ilhan Omar's entry page that would have been relevant to his decision?
:6. And why doesn't User:Telling have to defend the ''non sequitur'' he made about Ilhan Omar based on the evidence he himself presented in the same place I rehearsed the actions he took a few months after I left so it can help LT determine whether what he proposed about Ilhan Omar were true or not, and which may very well be prejudicial to that woman's honor?
:7. Further, based on evidence of my view of Recent Changes, why was User:Telling permitted to carry out odd jobs unrelated to the factuality challenge I posed to his contributions the very next day, while having failed to have answered the challenge, admittedly without the additional context Rob Smith removed providing further documentation of importance to the issues being discussed.
:8. And why doesn't User:RobSmith himself have to defend [depicting ''VM''] my careful delineative description of the situation as "trash-talk" towards another editor? He even erased my indignant but polite reply to that qualitative description when he moved it to the talk page, so had User:Telling seen it, he would have been misled into thinking I had no answer for this Administrator's expressions of harsh disappoval after many hours, when it had been a matter of a few minutes.
:What's as bad, is that I ''don't'' have access to the Talk:Main_Page history, so I can neither restore the replies I made to you about that hostile reference you made nor any of the other remarks I made in the context of misconduct.
:Time is of the essence in matters like this, when persons' reputations are dangling, so this forces me to reply on an ''ad hoc'' basis, increasing the probability of inflammatory words being exchanged due to the rigid propriety required due to persons' reputations and the likelihood of it being scoured in ''minutiae'' for defects by which the entirety of the passages complaining of misconduct against persons gets thrown out altogether ''versus'' the need to promptly render aid to the persons' reputations, which may be at risk of damage as people arrive to view the discussion or what passed transitorily according to the Talk:Main_page history and, to top it off, a history to which I have been denied access of view.
:Paranoia often emerges from tension between broadly contrary or unevenly-scaled choices between which we must maintain a balance. I think it's fair to characterize Rob Smith's removal of my challenge from Talk:Main Page as paranoiagenic. This disregard for the mental state of the clients of Conservapedia on a sensitive subject, which fortunately didn't affect me, is an unfortunate disregard for the condition in which a response to the cumbersome tasks requiring careful concern to carry out that he placed before them to accomplish.
:Let's add a third-diversely contrary or differently-scaled tension, though others could be mentioned, a subject upon which I'll draw to a conclusion: working on the Lord's Day. What would have happened if midway through this complaint the work had suddenly become onerous, and I would have been unable to continue. Time would have ticked by slowly as the onus of protecting reputations would have formed a vicious circle, or worse, a chaotic system, with my unwillingness to work onerously, until the feelings of laboriousness would have settled down, before which point it could very well have been a factor of overinterest to my mind. And yet I'm somehow asked to take these potential ordeals lightly and render them as of no account.
:By the way, I don't regard these complaints as provocations, but how do you invalidate something like that, after all. If they're contrary to his interest in any way, Rob Smith will regard it as such, apparently. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:04, March 5, 2023 (EST)